The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-08-31
THE PACIFIC INQUIRY.
Additional Points from Justice Fields Rul-
ing in the Case of Senator Stanford.

SAN Francisco, Aug. 30.-In his opinion
deciding that the Pacific commission cannot
compel the surrender of the Central Pacific
books, Justice Field, of the United States
Supreme Court said: Few rights are of greater
Importance or more essential TO a citizens peace
and happiness than the right of personal secur-
ity. and that involves not merely the protection
of his person from assault, but exemption of his
private affairs. books and papers from the in
spection and scrutiny of others. Without the
enjoyment of this right all other rights would
loose half their value. The law provides for
compulsory production, in the progress of
judicial proceedings, as by direct suit for that
purpose, of such documents rs affect
the interests of others, and also
in certain cases. for the seizure of
eliminating papers necessary for the prosecu-
tion Of offenders against public justice, and
only in one of these ways can they be obtained
and their contents made known against the will
of the The act of Congress not only
authorizes searching investigation into the
methods, affairs and business of the Central Pa
cifc Railroad Company, but it makes it the
duty of the railroad commission to inquire into
to ascertain and report whether any of the
directors, officers, or employees of that company
have been or are now directly or indirectly in.
teresred, and to what amount extent in any
other railroad, steamship, telegraph. express,
mining, construction or other business company
or corporation, and with which any agreements
understandings. or leases have been made or en-
tered into There one hun
dred officers. principal and minor, of
the Central Pacific Railroad Company,
and nearly five thousand employees.
1t is not unreasonable to suppose that large
proportion of those have the same interest as
jtockholders or otherwise in some other COM
paDy or corporation, with which, a railway
company. they may have an agreement OF some
kind, and il would be difficult to state the ex-
Sent to which an exploration by the commission
into the private affairs of these persons may not
go if the mandate of the could be fully car
Fied out. The commission is limited in it's in
1uiries the interests of these directors officers
and employees in any other business. company or
corporation. to such matters these persons
may choose to disclose, They cannot be com
PEELED to open their books and expose such other
business, as business. to the inspection and ex-
animation of the commission.
"With reference the vouchers respecting
which the principal interrogatories are pro-
pounded, and TO which asked TO compel
answers from the witness 1t is conceded by the
commissioners that moneys covered by them
were not charged against the United States in
ascertaining the net earnings of the company
III such was the case it is difficult TO what in
forest the United States can have in the dspo-
sltion OF those moneys Be that as it may, the
general courts cannot, upon that concession aid
the commission in ascertaiuing how the moneys
were expended These courts cannot become an
ihSLEuheub OF the commission turtherlDg
Its investigation. The act of Congress
creating the railroad commission in terms
provides. as already stated. that it may invoke
the ard OF any circuit or district require
lhe attendance of witnesses and the production
OF books papers and documents relating to the
subject OF the inquiry, and empowers the court,
Tor contumaey or refusal of persons to obey sub
poenas, to issue orders requiring them to appear
before the commissioners. or either of them and i
produce the books and papers ordered and give
evidence touching the matters in question and
to punish disobedience to its orders and does
not appear 10 leave any discretion in the mat
ter with the court. The federal courts
cannot bs made instruments TO aid the
commissioners in their Investigations and il
also renders it unnecessary to make any COM
ment upoL the extraordinary position taken by
them, according to the statement of the re-
spondcnt, to which we have referred, thas they
MD not regard themselves bound in their ex-
amin pation by the ordinary rules of evidence,
but would receive hearsaY and ex parte state
me Its. surrnises and information of every char
Lcter that might be called TO their attention. 1t
cannot be that the courts of the United States
san be used to the furtherance of Investigations
in which all rules of evidence may be thus dis
regarded" judges Sawyer and Sabin concur in
the opinion.